It shows Mac at 11.49 %, not 7% .... plus, if you drill down you can see that Win7, which isn't even included in the Macrulz chart, accounts for 19.1% of total windows. .... chart info is for the last 12 months.

Come on Macrulz, if you're going to take the time to post something, at least make sure you're "up to date" .... unless of course .... you're just trying to "manipulate the info".. ....

Apple, bigger than Google, √ ..... bigger than Microsoft, √ The universe is unfolding as it should. Thanks, Apple.

Why does Apple still make 3 different Magsafe power adapters with different wattages and trivial difference in size when all MacBooks, MacBook Pros and MacBook Airs can just use the highest rated adapter?

A power adaptor isn't anywhere analogs to something as complicated as an iPhone or computer, but nice try.

Also, larger power adaptors also cost more and consume more energy - why ship an oversized power adaptor and incur the waste in materials and energy consumption when it's trivial for something as simple as a power adaptor to be sized appropriately for it's intended use?

We are talking quantities in the millions so slight variations add up very, very quickly and the impact is significant.

I posted the chart in response to shigzeo's comment that "Apple will eat the competition until the competition realise that they must bring something unique to the table."

As a Mac customer for 20 years and a shareholder for 10, I'd sure like that to be true. And I'll go further than most here in suggesting that it may not be impossible to see Apple hit a 20% share for OS X within the next few years.

But the fact is that whether we like it or not, we live in a Windows-dominated world.

Do we? With the iPad, Apple has concretely established a new category of computing it first created with the iPhone - mobile personal. I would submit that the potential for this category far excels the current "traditional" Windows/Mac OSX computing world.

So while it's true Windows dominates "traditional" computing, I submit it doesn't matter. Apple's iOS ecosystem is a new computing ecosystem that is set to eclipse the one before it, just as personal computers eclipsed mini computers before them and mini computers eclipsed mainframe computers before them.

Microsoft is king of the previous generation of computing - good for them. So was Digital before them and IBM before them. At least IBM is still around today having moved onto other sources of revenue. It will be interesting to see how MS re-invents themselves going forward.

Steve Jobs even talked about this - many thought he was being defetist in his comments about Microsoft winning the desktop war and "milking the Macintosh and moving on to the next big thing". Well guess what - he's done exactly that and the industry hasn't figured out how to respond yet - meanwhile Apple has almost five years on everyone else and they show no signs of letting up in the least.

With the next iOS if Apple transforms it into not requiring iTunes but allowing activation through the cloud... watch out below! Combine that with dropping the current iPad hardware by $100 like they have done in the past with the iPhone's and that will be yet another boost.

It's a new game. Mac vs. Windows market share discussions may be interesting, but for the iOS they are pretty much irrelevant and missing the point.

Fighting Microsoft for market share in traditional computing was a loosing proposition so Apple changed the rules of the game. It's certainly fun to watch!

A power adaptor isn't anywhere analogs to something as complicated as an iPhone or computer, but nice try.

Also, larger power adaptors also cost more and consume more energy - why ship an oversized power adaptor and incur the waste in materials and energy consumption when it's trivial for something as simple as a power adaptor to be sized appropriately for it's intended use?

We are talking quantities in the millions so slight variations add up very, very quickly and the impact is significant.

Are the 45W (Macbook Air), 60W (13 inch MacBook Pro), and 85W (15 and 17 inch MacBook Pro) Magsafe adapters really that different? Yet they all cost the same $79 from Apple.

Energy consumption? Wouldn't the power adapter only consume as much energy as the device requires? Just because a power adapter is rated at 85W, does that mean it always draws 85 watts?

So why bother making 3 different versions with different packaging and different SKUs causing inventory bloat?

It's not about how much it draws in total, it's about efficiency - larger adaptors require larger components that are less efficient at lower wattages.

An 85w adapter consumes more power to deliver 10w than a smaller adapter.

Well, there must be a reason then - why indeed.

Unless you are essentially implying by your somewhat rhetorical question that Apple is stupid and "causing inventory bloat" for no reason?

I think we can both agree that is pretty silly since Apple has demonstrated they are far from stupid. So you've answered your own question then...

Logically speaking, if a company has chosen to use several different PSUs then we must consider that its the most economical option for their needs. When we consider a company, like Apple, that seems to limit the number of products (read: SKUs) it sells to a point that pisses off many Apple fans while discouraging those that say theyd buy a particular Apple product if they offered a certain configuration (e.g.: larger iPhone, smaller iPad, xMac, Mac Pro mini, Mac Mini pro) how can we not assume that the most likely reason for Apple including 45W PSU with MBAs instead of 85W PSUs have a very real and very meaningful reason to Apple bottom line that they dont think could be satisfied by including 85W PSUs for all their notebooks.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

Logically speaking, if a company has chosen to use several different PSUs then we must consider that its the most economical option for there needs. When we consider a company, like Apple, that seems to limit the number of products (read: SKUs) it sells to a point that pisses off many Apple fans while discouraging those that say theyd buy a particular Apple product if they offered a certain configuration (e.g.: larger iPhone, smaller iPad, xMac, Mac Pro mini, Mac Mini pro) how can we not assume that the most likely reason for Apple including 45W PSU with MBPs instead of 85W PSUs have a very real and very meaningful reason to Apple bottom line that they dont think could be satisfied by including 85W PSUs for all their notebooks.

This is especially true given Apple's frequent standardization on more expensive parts across models/lines. Standardizing the chargers must simply not make sense for one or maybe even a variety of reasons.

Maybe it should stop spending so much time energy and money on phones and go back to being supplier of parts and manufacturing television.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

Cybermart, a retail subsidiary of Apple partner Foxconn, is planning an aggressive expansion in Greater China after winning distribution rights for Apple products, according to a new report. Samsung was unable to capitalize on its iPad and iPhone challengers, posting its lowest quarterly profit in six quarters. Finally, a Microsoft spokesperson said the company was "looking into" a Mac App Store version of its Office productivity suite.

Cybermart

Cybermart International, a member of the Foxconn Group, recently obtained status as a "first-grade distributor" for Apple in the Greater China area, Taiwanese industry publication DigiTimes reported Friday.

The retail chain, which currently has 34 outlets around China, is planning a massive expansion of up to 500 Apple licensed retail shops, which will reportedly offer on-site repair services, in China, Hong Kong and Taiwan, said chairman Steve Chang. The first such store will open in Tianjin on April 1, 2011, with 7-8 more new stores to follow in 2011.

Foxconn, one of Apple's largest manufacturers, recently came under criticism after a series of worker suicides.

According to Apple Chief Operating Officer Tim Cook, China has been Apple's "top priority" for several years. "We put enormous energy into China. And the results of that have been absolutely staggering." The iPhone maker revealed last week that revenue from China had quadrupled year over year. Apple's four retail stores in mainland China were the highest traffic and highest revenue locations for the company.

Samsung

With modest smartphone and tablet sales unable to cover weak sales of chips and flatscreens, South Korean electronics giant Samsung missed analysts' expectations when it reported the weakest quarterly profit in six quarters on Friday.

Samsung reported 3.0 trillion won ($2.7 billion) in operating profit for the December quarter, well below consensus expectations of 3.4 trillion won. Nearly half of the company's profit came from Samsung's telecom division, Reuters reports.

With 10 million Google Android-based Galaxy S smartphones sold since June and sales of 2 million Galaxy tablets last quarter, Samsung has seen a measure of success in the mobile space, but has been unable to translate units sold into the record profits that Apple has racked up in recent quarters.

With the recently announced Galaxy Player, Samsung is attempting to match Apple's three flagship iOS products: the iPhone, iPad, and iPod touch, with competing Android versions. The 7-inch Galaxy Tab, though billed as the iPad's first "real" competitor, has been characterized as "a little bit of a disappointment."

Its something we are looking at, said Microsofts Amanda Lefebvre. Its something we havent ruled out, she said. We just have to see how that relates to our business.

According to the report, Microsoft may also be planning to bring Office to the iPhone, as the company recently released its OneNote note-taking program on the iOS App Store. You can absolutely expect Office to expand its presence across other platforms, said Microsoft senior director Jason Bunge in a recent interview.

When Apple launched the Mac App Store early this month, software giants Microsoft and Adobe were conspicuously missing from the digital storefront. With almost no competition from other major software vendors, Apple's own applications have consistently been the highest grossing on the Mac App Store, bringing in millions of dollars of revenue for the Mac maker.

Microsoft, however, has begun offering a free 30 day trial of Office for Mac on its website, something that can't be done through the Mac App Store.

The Windows maker announced mixed quarterly results Thursday, as sales of PCs have slowed and Windows Phone 7 has failed to take off.

Dude, relax. If you've been using the Mac a long time you know how suspect and varying market share stats are. Remember the '90s when it was said that Mac OS had a 2.2% share?
Given the broadly varying range of stats out there, the best approach is to read many stats and make your own judgment, rather than cherry-picking the one you feel looks more favorable.

By your own admission, individual stats are so misleading that they should be ignored .... but yet you "chose a chart that is so "out of date" that it doesn't even include Windows 7 ..... what does that say about "your intention"? Nobody here is arguing the fact that MS still has the leading marketshare in OS usage .... that is obvious. All I'm saying is: If you're going to the trouble to post a chart .... why cherry pick, make an attempt at accuracy .... is that too much to ask for? ... cheers.

Apple, bigger than Google, √ ..... bigger than Microsoft, √ The universe is unfolding as it should. Thanks, Apple.

A power adaptor isn't anywhere analogs to something as complicated as an iPhone or computer, but nice try.

Also, larger power adaptors also cost more and consume more energy - why ship an oversized power adaptor and incur the waste in materials and energy consumption when it's trivial for something as simple as a power adaptor to be sized appropriately for it's intended use?

We are talking quantities in the millions so slight variations add up very, very quickly and the impact is significant.

This is exactly the opposite approach the EU is using with cell phone chargers. One size fits all. I brought up the same argument you have. Small cell phones that use little power will have the same size charger as will the big 5" screen models. While I understand what they're trying to do, it has its own waste.

By your own admission, individual stats are so misleading that they should be ignored .... but yet you "chose a chart that is so "out of date" that it doesn't even include Windows 7 ..... what does that say about "your intention"? Nobody here is arguing the fact that MS still has the leading marketshare in OS usage .... that is obvious. All I'm saying is: If you're going to the trouble to post a chart .... why cherry pick, make an attempt at accuracy .... is that too much to ask for? ... cheers.

Which one of his charts are you talking about? I don't see a problem with them.

Maybe it should stop spending so much time energy and money on phones and go back to being supplier of parts and manufacturing television.

I know that everyone in the USA thinks that Samsung are a television manufacturer, but they only recently started that business, after acquiring NEC technology. Samsung started out as a sugar company and made ships, buildings, construction equipment before they every started with electronics.

They should start to make stuff that matters, not TVs bought from foreign companies. There is no brand image with Samsung besides big. If they make TV's they should stick with it and make great TV's working on that image. They should do the same with their other products and if they were the progeny of any other nation than south Korea, they would be broken up for wielding too much power.

They have no focus nor do they have any idea of where to go. That is why they make nice hardware but have no platform to play it on that shows their hardware. They are playing too many games, but with no sense of the pitch.

I know that everyone in the USA thinks that Samsung are a television manufacturer, but they only recently started that business, after acquiring NEC technology. Samsung started out as a sugar company and made ships, buildings, construction equipment before they every started with electronics.

They should start to make stuff that matters, not TVs bought from foreign companies. There is no brand image with Samsung besides big. If they make TV's they should stick with it and make great TV's working on that image. They should do the same with their other products and if they were the progeny of any other nation than south Korea, they would be broken up for wielding too much power.

They have no focus nor do they have any idea of where to go. That is why they make nice hardware but have no platform to play it on that shows their hardware. They are playing too many games, but with no sense of the pitch.

That's what most of these big companies do. By the way, I really like my 61" Samsung DLP LED set. The colors are much better than any Model, front or rear projection that uses a projection bulb, and better than any LCD, including the LED backlit models, because mine uses three RGB LED's. The color is better than the new plasma's I've seen as well.

While they used to be known here in the USA for making junk, that reputation has changed in recent years. While I can't account for what they have there, they've got a pretty good rep here now.

In fact, S. Korean companies have been moving up in class for some time.

I have a hard time using anything samsung simply because they own everything here. Go down the street and the apartments are all samsung. The same for grocery stores, shopping malls, hotels, amusement parks. They own large portions of the government, haven't paid taxes in years, and do a lot of cover up of things that would make foxconn's suicides look like timid attempts at inspiration.

They own the newspapes, the television, online media AND make stuff for Apple. I simply won't touch their stuff because it is tainted in so many ways. It is sad that people abroad are rooting for them as they are some sort of underdog. How does the largest conglomerate in the world even maintain an underdog stance? It is through control, secrecy, and lots and lots of crime.

Still, there is something mesmerising about their image.

Quote:

Originally Posted by melgross

That's what most of these big companies do. By the way, I really like my 61" Samsung DLP LED set. The colors are much better than any Model, front or rear projection that uses a projection bulb, and better than any LCD, including the LED backlit models, because mine uses three RGB LED's. The color is better than the new plasma's I've seen as well.

While they used to be known here in the USA for making junk, that reputation has changed in recent years. While I can't account for what they have there, they've got a pretty good rep here now.

In fact, S. Korean companies have been moving up in class for some time.

I have a hard time using anything samsung simply because they own everything here. Go down the street and the apartments are all samsung. The same for grocery stores, shopping malls, hotels, amusement parks. They own large portions of the government, haven't paid taxes in years, and do a lot of cover up of things that would make foxconn's suicides look like timid attempts at inspiration.

They own the newspapes, the television, online media AND make stuff for Apple. I simply won't touch their stuff because it is tainted in so many ways. It is sad that people abroad are rooting for them as they are some sort of underdog. How does the largest conglomerate in the world even maintain an underdog stance? It is through control, secrecy, and lots and lots of crime.

Still, there is something mesmerising about their image.

I don't believe anyone here thinks of them as an underdog. It's just that their products went from the cheap discount stuff you wouldn't admit buying, to top tier stuff that you brag about having.